OR, ETHICS AND
DECISIONS
THE OATH OF PROMETHEUS
by Jean-Pierre Brans, Prometheus 001
Abstract
This paper sums up the ideas submitted to the OR community at the opening lecture of the EURO XVII Conference in Budapest on July,17th 2000. The paper aims to initiate a strong movement in favour of Ethics in OR.
The role of OR is first emphasised. An analogy with Physics is considered. There are strong similarities between OR and Physics but also major differences. While Physics is modelling Natural Real World Phenomena, OR is facing Human Systems. However, in Physics "GOD" is keeping the decision stick unchanged, i.e. the laws of Physics remain the same, while in OR the responsible actor is the Decision-maker. "GOD" has been replaced by man.: it is a Promethean-like situation.
It is then suggested to have all decisions well-balanced between the influence of three poles. In the early years of OR a "Rational pole" has first been developed. From the 1970's a "Subjective Pole" has been considered to include the emotionality, the real-life experience, the preferences of the Decision-maker. In the future an "Ethical pole" should also be taken into account to respect the social and the ecological environment of the affected people, to promote sustainable development for the future generations.
In order to stimulate an Ethical dialogue, an OR commitment, the OATH of PROMETHEUS, has been proposed to the OR community. The author strongly hopes that all OR researchers will support this action and take the oath.
§1. THE IMPORTANCE OF OR
Operational Research (OR) is presently more than 60 years old. According to the tradition it started in the U.K. in 1937. It is now a successful confirmed science the models of which are regularly used to support Human activities in Economy, Finance, Engineering, Sociology, Politics, …
Let us first compare OR with Physics. Both Physics and OR are modelling Real World systems in order to describe, to understand and finally to manage the situation. Between Physics and OR there are strong similarities but also major differences. While Physics is treating Natural Phenomena, OR deals with Human systems. In both fields, Real World situations can be treated qualitatively or quantitatively. The qualitative approach is supported by perceptions, apprecia-tions and feelings, while quantitative approaches are requiring models and measurements.
Since the most ancient times, and more especially since the time of NEWTON (1642-1724) quantitative approaches have been applied in Physics. In the last 300 years the progresses were so important that all Natural Phenomena are now in practice exclusively analysed by quantitative approaches. The results are impressive: Physicists and Engineers succeeded in building bridges and roads, railways, aircraft's and satellites, telecommunication networks, internet, …
In the case of Physics the knowledge can be accumulated in papers, books and libraries. The laws of nature remain the same and the models to approach them can be progressively improved. "God" is not cheating. The decision stick with regard to Physical laws doesn't move, being a huge advantage ! (Of course this is not always true, especially in Modern Physics where many laws of nature are stochastic and in evolution. It is then quite more difficult to control the phenomena, however in many cases the physicists and the engineers succeed in doing it quite well).
On the other hand each Human Real World situation is a new problem. It does not only depend on the Real World but also on the Decision-maker. Change the decision-maker, you have a new problem! The decision-maker has freedom: "GOD" has been replaced by man! According to the Greek mythology we may call this a PROMETHEAN situation. (PROMETHEUS "borrowed" the fire from the Gods).
For each Human Real World situation, numerous factors have to be considered. The preferences of the Decision-maker have to be included in the models, day after day the complexity of the problems is increasing because of new regulations, new markets, new clients, new production tools, … and in addition the human systems have a chaotic evolution and in some cases it is even catastrophic.
Consequently, qualitative approaches for Human Systems are becoming more and more hazardous. Also quantitative approaches like in Physics are required. It is the field of OR, the field of Decision Aid. However, as not everything can be modelled in Human Systems, OR remains an harmonious combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches.
The contributions over the last 60 years have been particularly remarkable and promising and the importance of OR is now considerable. It can be compared with Physics.
§2. OR: THE PAST, THE PRESENT, THE FUTURE
a. Rationality of the optimal solution
In the early years of OR all the models were single criterion models, such as Linear and Nonlinear programming, Dynamic programming, Queuing theory, Inventory Problems, Network analysis, … All the preferences of the Decision-maker were summarised into a single objective function. In such a case the notion of optimal solution makes sense and a resulting rationality has been developed: the Rationality of the Optimal Solution. From the 1960's discrete problems were also considered. It is the field of Combinatorial Analysis, scheduling, assignment, location, allocation, …
In many cases, due to the mathematical complexity of the problems it is impossible to calculate the optimal solution so that heuristic algorithms must be considered. The results related to the Rationality of the optimal solution are impressive and a real scientific status has been conferred to OR. However, many problems remain unsolved and the field still deserves investigations.
b. Subjectivity and Emotionality in OR
From the 1970's, it appeared clearly that, in many cases, the basic OR models were not properly fitting the preferences of the decision-makers. In order to improve the efficiency it has been requested to take into account the freedom of the decision-makers and to include into the models their subjectivity, their emotionality, their real life experience, their mind. It has not been an easy task, the Human Nature is so rich that several points of view had to be taken into account simultaneously. Several optimisation criteria were considered at the same time. In such a case optimal solutions usually do not exist, leading to the failure of the rationality of the optimal solution. Other Rationalities were developed, the field of Multicriteria decision-aid (MCDA) was born. Thanks to the dynamic action of Professor B. ROY a strong MCDA school appeared in Europe. Many efficient multicriteria methodologies were developed. At least 4 classes of criteria are regularly considered to govern Human systems: economical, technical, social and ecological criteria. MCDA now allows taking into account the personal subjective and emotional feelings of the Decision-makers. The developed models are quite realistic and particularly efficient to face the Human Real World situations.
- OR. Three poles of Influences -
c. Ethics in OR
Presently two important poles of interest have been considered. The rational pole (Rationality of the optimal solution) and the subjective pole (MCDA). It is now time to face the future and I strongly believe that an Ethical pole should also be taken into account. Up to now Ethics has not been considered as such in OR. However the evolution of mankind demands more and more Ethics. At least three Ethical components should be considered:
Respect for the Social Environment.
Not only the objectives of the Decision-makers have to be considered, but also those of the affected people, those enjoying or suffering the decisions made. This has not often been the case in OR. The final purpose is to ensure welfare to mankind and not to enrich financial institutions.
Everybody can easily quote numerous examples of non-ethical behaviour with regard to social environment. Advantages are taken from young people, elderly people are made redundant, production units are closed for strategic reasons although they are still profitable, In the tobacco industry ammonia is added to the cigarettes in order to increase the addiction of the smokers. Personally I have nothing against tobacco, it is the freedom of everybody to smoke or not to smoke, but it must remain a freedom. The adding of ammonia is an actual non-ethical behaviour. It is particularly damaging for young people aged 14-18, who often smoke a few years just as a challenge with regard to the adults, but who will not be able to stop afterwards due to their dependency. The OR models, if any, having been developed to support such actions in order to increase profits or market shares seem particularly reprehensible.
Respect for the Ecological Environment
Due to extensive human activities, life on Earth is now strongly in danger. In many fields pollution and waste are becoming dreadful. The CO2 emission and more generally the greenhouse gases are particularly worrying. In the western countries 12 tons CO2 are ejectsed each year per capita. Only 8 % of this emission is managed by Nature, the remaining 92 % are accumulated in the atmosphere! Fortunately they are also other countries and oceans, but in any case the average temperature of the Earth is increasing rapidly (about 1 °C during the last 50 years) and expo-nentially. Because of the melting of the glaciers the sea level could progressively rise up to 100 m! You can imagine the disaster, as 90 % of the world population is living along the coasts. A visit to the lovely Amsterdam city could be soon a submarine visit! It is not guaranteed that an industrial civilisation can be maintained more than 300 years on a planet like Earth without a drastic Ethical behaviour. Our industrial civilisation is now already 200 years old. With an appropriate and careful behaviour it is probably possible to extend it during thousands of years.
The KYOTO-RIO-BUENOS AIRES agreements requested a drastic reduction of the CO2 emission for 2010. Up to now the governments have not faced the problem and the emissions are still exponentially growing. Nobody seems to be interested in that problem because of the 4 years rhythm of the elections. It is however a terrible problem, the Nature is in danger. Both technological advances and appropriate management are required. Both Physics and OR have to cooperate hand in hand.
Respect of the next generations.
The next generations also deserve respect. According to a beautiful African saying "We don't inherit the Earth from our parents, we borrow it from our children". It should be considered as a postulate to offer sustainable development to the next generations. The problems of the raw materials, of the water resources, of the Energy resources are already crucial, they will become extremely worrying in a few years. Without an Ethical behaviour the ultimate horizon for mankind on Earth could be 50, 100, 150 years, 2 or 3 generations more, although human beings appeared on Earth about 6 millions years ago.
Ethics as such is not a pole of methods and theorems, it is a pole of Ideas. Ethical ideas should feed the Rational and the Subjective poles. An Ethical behaviour with regard to our Social and Ecological Environment is required. Everybody should contribute: technological advances are expected, appropriate management is compulsory. It is a question of research, of goodwill. Ethical components should be included in all decision models. All decisions should be well-balanced between Rationality, Subjectivity and Ethics. All individual contributions are small, but only thousands of them might guarantee a large and strong result. The challenge is sustainable development, welfare for the young and the next generations. The future of mankind is involved.
It is possible to include some special Ethical components in our OR models. For instance, I succeeded in obtaining a graphical representation of the "Ethical Conscience" in the GAIA plane with regard to a MCDA problem (cfr. BRANS 1999). Of course this is not a unique final solution. Everybody should consider Ethical components in his own work. It is a promising field of Research. A permanent dialogue on Ethics should start between all OR researchers. Only such a dialogue can save mankind from the terrible dangers it is facing. The responsibility of OR, as science of decision aid is involved.
§ 3 THE OATH OF PROMETHEUS
In medicine, it has been a tradition for all young physicians to take the "Hippocratic Oath". It was a commitment to face their professional activities with a sense of duty, with fairness, with kindness of heart. The only reason for which this commitment is no longer considered by the medical associations is that it has never been updated to the requisites of our modern civilisation. It remains however a nice tradition, a guarantee of devotion, of honesty.
At the opening session of EURO XVII in Budapest, in my address entitled "OR, Ethics and Decision" I suggested to all OR researchers to take also a solemn professional commitment. I proposed to call it the "OATH OF PROMETHEUS" according to the comparison with Physics where "GOD" is controlling the physical laws, while in OR "MAN" becomes responsible of the Management of the human systems.
The "OATH OF PROMETHEUS" should be a nice hinge between the XXth and the XXIst centuries, between the second and the third millennium, a nice celebration of the 25th anniversary of EURO.
The "OATH OF PROMETHEUS" aims to federate all the OR people of goodwill. On the one hand it provides the largest freedom to investigate any field of interest. On the other hand it stimulates not only cooperation in favour of the objectives of the decision-makers, but also respect for the social and ecological environment. In addition it requests to keep in mind the necessity to support sustainable development for the next generations.
The Oath of PROMETHEUS
As an OR researcher, I request the largest freedom to collaborate with my colleagues and to investigate without any limits all ideas, all techniques and all methods in any field. However, I shall always keep in mind that the results of my research could possibly be used for Human purposes.
As an OR teacher, I commit myself: - to transmit honestly my knowledge and my know-how; - to respect my colleagues and to collaborate with them in a spirit of dialogue; - to discuss with my students the consequences of the possible decisions proposed by the OR models.
As a decision-maker, I commit myself to take into account not only my own objectives but also the social, economic and ecological dimensions of the problems.
As a consultant or an analyst, I commit myself to convince the decision-makers to adopt a fair ethical behaviour and to assist them to meet their goals within the limits of sustainable development. I will feel myself free to refuse to provide information or tools, which to my opinion, could bring into danger the social welfare of mankind and the ecological future of Earth
Jean-Pierre. BRANS - Brussels-Belgium - July 2000
The "OATH OF PROMETHEUS" has nothing against honour, it can be taken together with any other Ethical commitment by any OR researcher in the world. It is a commitment in favour of fairness, devotion and honesty with regard to Ethical concerns in OR. It seems to me of crucial importance according to the role of OR in the field of Decision Aid, according to the challenges with regard to management ; the future of Mankind is involved.
All those taking the OATH OF PROMETHEUS may be proud of it. They accept to stimulate the dialogue on Ethics in OR and to include as far as possible some Ethical components in their contributions.
Any OR researcher willing to join the PROMETHEUS takers is invited to let me know by mail or by E-mail. My address is in front of this paper. A PROMETHEUS number will be conferred to you and, from then, you are invited to mention your PROMETHEUS number on your stationeries, on your addresses, in your papers, your publications, your mails, your E-mails. You will be immediately identified as a respectable person open to Ethical concerns and all those having similar interests will be able to get in touch with you for dialogue.
In order to diffuse Ethical ideas as much as possible you are invited to submit the OATH OF PROMETHEUS to all your OR collaborators. And when one of your graduate or postgraduate OR student is achieving his degree, why shouldn't you organise a friendly ceremony for letting him take the OATH. A nice tradition to initiate isn't it ?
I would be extremely delighted to be supported in this action. Please be in touch with me, let us all together try to change the face of the world !
§ 4 OTHER PROPOSALS
1. Ethics in OR is also a problem of Education. I suggest to everybody in charge of teaching programmes to increase the importance of the courses devoted to societal and Ethical problems in his institution. At the EPFL (Ecole Polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne) 20% of the courses are already related to such subjects. We can easily imagine how well-prepared the engineers of that school will be to face their professional activities. Undoubtedly a good example !
2. An Ethical label (comparable to the PROMETHEUS OATH) could possibly be offered to all private enterprises and public institutions. Simply on request ! It would be a guarantee of respect of the social and the ecological environment, a guarantee to consider sustainable development, but also a promotion for the enterprises and the institutions with regard to the affected people. In case of non Ethical behaviour, the media could let it know and the involved products or services could then be banned. This is of course not a proper OR matter, but the board of EURO could possibly negotiate such an action with the EU. Why not! It would be a substantial progress in favour of Ethics in general !
A EURO Ethical Committee could possibly be set up, the purpose of which would be to stimulate Ethics in OR and to update, say every 10 years, the OATH OF PROMETHEUS (2010, 2020, 2030 …) in function of the evolution of mankind.
REFERENCES